PAP gahmen will hold elections ASAP...

...instead of later.

A lot smokescreens are being thrown lately, from PAP MPs to the 148th media. This is becos when it comes to politics, the entire gahmen machinery works towards one party's agenda and interest.

The economic woes are unprecedented, and will get worse. Logically PAP will want an unchallenged mandate for another 5 yrs ASAP.

So despite the public denials and pronouncements, all signs point to an election that will be held ASAP, earliest during the March school holidays.

The opposition should gear up NOW.

.

Friday nite...

.

Deep Psychosis (Daniel Kandis Cure Mix) - Luke Warner & Mat Lock


.

PAP just doesn't get it

This time is Lui, again...

Feb 5, 2009
Online attacks from netizens
Minister rues poor conduct
Opportunity lost for online community to regulate itself, says Lui

WHEN MP Seng Han Thong was set on fire by a Yio Chu Kang resident last month, he drew many online attacks that were vicious.

Some were 'downright outrageous', said Senior Minister of State (Information, Communications and the Arts) Lui Tuck Yew in Parliament yesterday.

He was referring to postings that included statements saying Mr Seng deserved to be assaulted and a list of 10 things he should 'be thankful for' in spite of being attacked.

But instead of silencing these attackers, the online community largely bit their tongue.

The tepid response of netizens to the nasty comments disappointed Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui, who said it was 'quite apparent the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be'.

RADM Lui was replying to Ms Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC), who had asked for his views on netizens' response to the physical attack on Mr Seng, MP for Yio Chu Kang.

He said: 'I do not think the community itself has done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens.

'It is a squandered opportunity for a higher degree of self-regulation.It would have been an example of the genesis, of the first steps, towards a more responsible, greater, self-regulatory regime.

'But many of those responses were not rebutted or answered, and I think it is not healthy for some of this to remain on the Net unchallenged, unquestioned and unanswered.'

RADM Lui also urged netizens to do more to define acceptable online conduct.

So what really is the issue here?

The fact that some PAP MPs are so disliked and therefore not many netizens can empathise? Or perhaps the PAP has become so unpopular these days with young, better educated, and savvy Sporeans that anything unfortunate that happens to the PAP and its members is taken as positive news and something to cheer about? hahahaha the tuth hurts sia!

Of cos the Rear Admirer Lui, being a backdoor MP and parachuted into office as minister, does not or seems unable to understand this. Instead he whines and complains, threatens more regulation to something he knows very well that is near impossible to regulate.

Then again maybe he does not know, which would hardly be surprising hahahaha...


.

Red herring

Here is what you do to create a distraction. You create an imaginary issue so that the real issue is obscured.

Feb 1, 2009
Not breaking piggy bank

THE Government is not 'breaking the piggy bank' even as it is dips into its past reserves - for the first time - to help fund a record $20.5 billion spending plan, said Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong on Sunday.

'To break the piggy bank is to allow all the notes and coins to spill out, with no controls over how much is spent. We are not doing that,' he told his Marine Parade constituents at a Chinese New Year celebration lunch.

While Mr Goh said the Government had to take this unprecedented step of seeking the President's approval to use a small portion of Singapore's past reserves to tackle its worst-ever recession, he emphasised that 'our reserves must continue to be protected.'

'We must continue to exercise great discipline and not dip into our reserves at the first sign of difficulties. We should tap it only as a last resort and when there are compelling reasons,' he said.

SM Goh said he he favours putting up three 'No' signs when drawing on the reserves.

First, no use of the reserves to support social assistance programmes.

As a general principle, the Government must continue to fund such programmes out of revenues raised in the current term of government, not past reserves, said Mr Goh.

Second, no draw for permanent programmes. Such programmes like Workfare and ComCare, no matter how meritorious, should be funded by current revenues and reserves.

Third, no draw except under dire circumstances when one-off extraordinary measures are required to ward off catastrophe or prevent irreparable damage to the economy.

Taking pains to drive home the point, he reiterated: 'When this economic recession is over, we must continue our policy of growing our reserves by living within our means and running a modest budget surplus. As the present situation shows, our reserves are the best insurance for our own and our children's future.

'Use them wisely and sparingly. Never break the piggy bank.'

The President has given his in-principle approval to a Government's request to draw $4.9 billion from reserves accumulated before its current term of office.

The money is to fund two measures aimed at saving jobs and keeping businesses afloat in this downturn.

It is doing so even though it has built up sufficient savings during its current term, which began in 2006, in order to have 'full flexibility' to respond to the current economic crisis, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said in his Budget statement on Jan 22.

Also, the two 'extraordinary' measures the draw will pay for are temporary and will not be built into longer-term government programmes, and should therefore be separately funded, he said.

The two measures are the Jobs Credit scheme which subsidises employers' wage bills to the tune of some $4.5 billion, and the Special Risk-Sharing Initiative which will help viable mid-sized companies get access to credit.

Mr Tharman had said that Singapore's past reserves were 'substantial' and 'well in excess of our liabilities'.

The Government has never disclosed the full extent of these reserves. Past estimates by analysts have ranged from $300 billion to $600 billion.

This is the second time the Government had gone to President Nathan. In October last year, it sought his approval for a $150 billion guarantee on all bank deposits here to be backed by past reserves.

During the Asian financial crisis in 1998, for instance, when the economy grew by just 1.5 per cent, Mr Goh, then-Prime Minister, had dismissed suggestions that the reserves be drawn on.

He said then: 'Once foolishly spent, they will be most difficult to build up again. As your trustee responsible for these reserves, I am honour-bound to protect them. We must not fritter them away, whatever the pressures we face.'

In his Sunday speech at the Marine Parade constituency lunch, SM Goh said after Mr Tharman's budget speech, a former Ambassador to Singapore recently teased him that Singapore was finally 'breaking the piggy bank!'

'I promptly corrected him. To break the piggy bank is to allow all the notes and coins to spill out, with no controls over how much is spent. We are not doing that,' he said.

'In this instance, before approaching the President, the Minister for Finance had first to convince the Prime Minister. They then had to convince the Cabinet. After that, the Government had to convince the President to use his second key to unlock the safe.

yadda yadda... The rest of it is here...

The question is:
Are people really concerned whether the piggybank will be broken? (incidentally S$5 billion withdrawn, as compared to US$24 billion thrown into rescuing western banks hahaha)
Or how the miserly S$5 billion is really benefitting workers or businesses?

hehehe...

.

Socialism for the rich

Jan 30, 2009
Budget is pro-worker

THE $20.5 billion Resilience Package unveiled last week in the Budget is more pro-worker than employees may realise, said labour chief Lim Swee Say yesterday.

He gave two reasons to support his point.

One, the Jobs Credit scheme to subsidise part of the wage bill of employers, makes Singaporeans more cost-competitive than foreign workers.

But more importantly, it avoids the need to cut employers' contribution to the Central Provident Fund (CPF). This second point, in particular, makes the package 'even more pro-worker than pro-business', he said.

Mr Lim was disputing the view held by some that the measures announced in the new Budget did a lot for businesses, but not enough for workers.

'This is a gross misunderstanding of the Resilience Package,' he told about 500 union leaders and NTUC staff at the labour movement's annual Workplan Seminar to set out its priorities and goals.

In his 90-minute speech, Mr Lim stressed that while it is a steep uphill task to save jobs in this recession, the labour movement 'die die, must try'.

'Never forget, to the worker who is unemployed, the unemployment rate is 100 per cent,' he said as he set out three key targets for the National Trades Union Congress. These are: keep a lid on layoffs so that the number does not breach the 29,000 level of the 1998 Asian financial crisis; ensure unemployment stays below the 5.2 per cent high reached in the 2003 Sars crisis; and work for a recovery that is faster than the global economy's.

Mr Lim acknowledged that the odds are stacked against achieving the layoff targets. Retrenchment in unionised companies is picking up, he noted, from 1,600 in the fourth quarter of last year to possibly at least some 3,000 this quarter.

'If this trend were to continue, I'd say the 29,000 record in 1998 could easily be surpassed within this year,' he said.

But he noted that the Republic has one powerful weapon in the battle against its worst post-war recession. He calls it 'The Singapore Advantage', which is the unity among the tripartite partners: NTUC, employers and the Government.

It is rare elsewhere, he said, referring to the US car industry and Hong Kong: 'We did not point fingers like the case of the US...We did not go on strike like the Hong Kong airport workers.'

Armed with this weapon, Mr Lim urged the tripartite partners to commit themselves to making Singapore the most pro-business economy in the world, the most pro-worker nation, the most united tripartism model and a place with the most caring labour movement.

He explained to union leaders that they can be pro-business by agreeing to a wage cut should the company's situation warrant it and management take the lead with a deeper cut.

'We must be prepared to mobilise the ground as long as the management is prepared to take the lead,' he said.

The approach would lead multinational companies to favour Singapore, he indicated. Following the new Budget measures, Japanese companies are re-submitting their proposals to their headquarters who are looking at downsizing operations in Japan, China or Singapore, he said.

In praising the Jobs Credit scheme, Mr Lim said that until last week, the biggest fear among unionists was a reduction in employers' CPF contribution.

Such a cut would hurt workers who are paying housing loans and saving for retirement. So, the Government's move to use past reserves to finance the $4.5 billion scheme was a big relief, he added.

The temporary wage subsidy - 12 per cent of each month's wages but only for the first $2,500 - is equivalent to a 9 percentage point CPF cut.

'If not for Jobs Credit, many workers will not enjoy the full 14.5 per cent contribution from the employer,' he said.

The president of the Food, Drinks and Allied Workers' Union, Mr Abdul Subhan Shamsul Hussein, told The Straits Times that Mr Lim's explanation clarified for him how the scheme was advantageous to workers.

He confessed that he and some of his union members had felt the Resilience Package was too pro-business as there were not as many direct cash giveaways as they had hoped.

Singapore Inc under the PAP has never been pro-worker. So you believe this sia suay guy? Hahahaa

"五千年历史有屁用"... scamming a living from those living in the past

LKY believes that cultural affiliation will make a difference when it comes to doing business with the Chinese.

Dec 17, 2008
S'pore needs to co-opt 50 Chinese steeped in the culture each year
By Li Xueying, Political Correspondent

As a former China national, Ms Tan knows how to woo clients from her old homeland.

PRIVATE banker Leiny Tan was born in Wuhan city, grew up in Guangdong province and got her university degree in the United States.

But she eventually decided to make Singapore her home after arriving here as a student in 1991.

Now a citizen, the 40-year-old is in charge of the China market for US banking giant Citigroup, responsible for managing the finances of super-rich Chinese nationals based here and in China.

As a former China national, Ms Tan knows how to woo clients from her old homeland. 'Knowing the language is an advantage as we need to be very clear and precise,' she told The Straits Times. 'Understanding the culture is another advantage - the Chinese are very private about their families, but if I ask them the right questions, for instance about their children, they're happy to open up.'

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew wants to see 50 Chinese nationals-turned-Singaporeans like Ms Tan every year, 'co-opted' to help Singapore engage China.

Speaking at a dialogue yesterday, Mr Lee said students from China may come here to master English. But if they come after secondary school, the depth of their Chinese 'can never be shaken'.

'So maybe we can co-opt 50 of them, and then we can bring them back to China to do business on our behalf.'

In 50 years, Mr Lee envisaged East Asia and China 'will be where the action is'. And Singapore needs some 300 talented people a year with the cultural background to connect with those in China.

'Our problem going forward is that our best and brightest do not want to spend their lives concentrating on China,' said Mr Lee. 'They want to go to America, they want to... see greener pastures in the English-educated world.'

So to engage China, Singapore now depends on its older generation who went through Chinese-stream education, and are familiar with Chinese allegories like Romance of the Three Kingdoms, he said.

Younger Singaporeans are conversant in Mandarin, but are lost once the conversation leaves familiar subjects.

Said Mr Lee: 'You (the Chinese) can sit down with the Taiwanese businessmen and while the whole night away drinking because you can talk about so many common things you share in history and culture...But with a Singaporean, it's hard facts, hard facts, and there isn't this cultural background.'

Mr Lee made the point in his reply to a question on how Singapore and China can work together looking forward. 'We are both learning more about each other,' he said. Citing the Suzhou Industrial Park built 14 years ago, he said the initial years were 'truly troublesome'.

Singapore 'must always remember' the experience of one of its officials working on the project, he said.

'One day, the Chinese said to him: 'How old is your country? You want to teach me how to do this? My country is 5,000 years old'. So he decided that you cannot tell them do this, do that. All you can do is (to say), I suggest to you, you examine this and if you think it's a good idea, you pick it up.'

So, Mr Lee anticipates fewer problems with the Tianjin eco-city Singapore is now helping to develop. 'We understand their style and they also understand us.'

My old man is chinese educated. He is one of those stubborn pro-China types who have their hearts in China even though he is born and raised here. And until a decade ago has never set foot on China.

Starting from the late 90s, he began to make holiday trips to China. Every other year or so he and my mom will travel to different parts of China, to visit the China they have read so much about from their early Chinese textbooks and education, the majestic sights, the cultural splendor. And when they return they will speak non-stop and fondly of the middle kngdom.

This went on for years until 2005 when these trips stopped. He has not visited China since, and the former fervour for all things China and Chinese has also died down and completely diminished around the dinner table.

Eventually I asked how come, and he grunted with disgust, "五千年历史有屁用?只懂的捧着历史吃饭!"

That about explains and sums up the 180 degree U turn in attitude toward the "motherland" hahaha.

My father, like most from his generation, voted for the PAP. I remember he used to berate me during dinner when i question the way LKY and PAP goes about suing opposition politicians.

Well not anymore. The past few years have seen another 180 degree U turn in my parents' view on politics. These days my old man is more ept to swear loudly at the TV whenever politicians in white appear, hahaha!

I guess even a stubborn old man like my father will one day stop living in the past and see the reality for what it is. Apparently not for some others, especially a non-Chinese educated ba ba, hehehe.

.

Tan Kin Lian's political "ambitions"?

By now everyone knows who Tan Kin Lian is ...

Nov 23, 2008
Tan Kin Lian eyes presidency
Ex-NTUC Income's chief will run if he has 100,000 people willing to support him
By Nur Dianah Suhaimi

HE HAS become a familiar face addressing the crowds of investors at Speakers' Corner.

Standing before Singaporeans and asking for their votes at an election could well be next on the agenda for Mr Tan Kin Lian.

The 60-year-old former chief executive officer of NTUC Income told The Sunday Times he is considering standing as Singapore's next elected president or contesting in the next general election as an independent candidate.

He made no bones about his political ambitions in an interview with the paper.

But first, this king of petitions wants to see at least 100,000 signatures and names of Singaporeans who are willing to give him their support.

'I will only do it if enough people want me to lead. If Singaporeans want change, they must have a stake in it and show their commitment by putting down their names. I cannot do this without strong support,' he said.

Such a petition should be put together by those who are keen to see him become a leader, and not by himself, he added.

.....

And as for his political ambitions, they are not for himself, but for Singapore, he claimed.

'I don't need to be president. I have enough money and I lead a simple life. I travel by bus and MRT even though I can afford a car. So what's the point? I don't need this kind of trouble,' said the father of three.

He bought a Toyota Camry for his wife four years ago and now shares it with her.

His wife, a housewife, fearing a political backlash, is also against the idea of him running for elected president and has even called him 'mad' for harbouring such an interest.

While he has to respect his wife's wishes, it is his dream that Singapore has leaders who represent the people and their aspirations.

'They don't have to be very highly educated. They just need to be the voice of the people.'

Which ward does he plan to contest in at the next general elections as an independent candidate, I asked.

Get the 100,000 signatures first, he replied.

'I need to know that people want the change. If not, then there is no point.'

The signatures of support will also help him convince his wife that he has enough backing to embark on a political career.

Said Mr Tan: 'Actually I prefer to take it easy. I've been working for 40 years. But if enough people want me to lead, then I will.'

If there are 100,000 SGians coming forward asking you to be their leader, how to say no? If 100,000 asked me to be their leader and for a good cause (and not say be terrorist leader or those will die kind lah hahaha!), I will also step up! I dare say anyone will step up. So like this count as ambition?

Sembawang GRC is the largest ward with about 185,000 people. So 100,000 people on your side is already a clear comfortable election win. You will have a clear mandate anywhere in SG.

The ST saying Tan has political ambition is misleading. In giving himself this hard-to-meet condition of 100,000 supporters, Tan shows his ambition is one of reluctance. He will be damn lucky to get half that number or 20,000. And even then he will win a landslide in any single ward contest.

So do you still think Tan has political ambition, as the ST puts it? If not, what then is the ST up to? Hmm...

.

Is Chartered Semicon a "good" firm? Hahaha

Notice how the PAP gahment likes to talk using feel-good and loaded words. Very vague, very unspecific one.

Nov 19, 2008
Govt won't let good firms fail
By Robin Chan

THE Government will soon enhance schemes to help cash-strapped businesses secure bank loans, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said in Parliament yesterday.

This is to avoid a scenario where good businesses are forced to close down owing to a lack of access to credit, he said.

Mr Tharman said the new measures will enhance existing loan schemes, and will mostly involve the Government sharing the risk of the loans with the banks.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had said on Sunday that with a protracted economic slowdown looming, some measures to help businesses and workers would be announced this week.

What do you mean by good firms? If they are good, why do they need help from gahment?

Let the best and fittest survive, isn't that what free market is all about?

The gahment through Temasek has been pumping into loss-making Chartered Semicon for years. Is Chartered Semicon a good company? Hahahaha!

.

Krugman

.
The global financial crisis has revived my interest in economics hehe, and this guy who just won a nobel prize in economics makes a lot sense leh...

Let’s Get Fiscal

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: October 16, 2008

The Dow is surging! No, it’s plunging! No, it’s surging! No, it’s ...

Nevermind. While the manic-depressive stock market is dominating the headlines, the more important story is the grim news coming in about the real economy. It’s now clear that rescuing the banks is just the beginning: the nonfinancial economy is also in desperate need of help.

And to provide that help, we’re going to have to put some prejudices aside. It’s politically fashionable to rant against government spending and demand fiscal responsibility. But right now, increased government spending is just what the doctor ordered, and concerns about the budget deficit should be put on hold.

Before I get there, let’s talk about the economic situation.

Just this week, we learned that retail sales have fallen off a cliff, and so has industrial production. Unemployment claims are at steep-recession levels, and the Philadelphia Fed’s manufacturing index is falling at the fastest pace in almost 20 years. All signs point to an economic slump that will be nasty, brutish — and long.

How nasty? The unemployment rate is already above 6 percent (and broader measures of underemployment are in double digits). It’s now virtually certain that the unemployment rate will go above 7 percent, and quite possibly above 8 percent, making this the worst recession in a quarter-century.

And how long? It could be very long indeed.

Think about what happened in the last recession, which followed the bursting of the late-1990s technology bubble. On the surface, the policy response to that recession looks like a success story. Although there were widespread fears that the United States would experience a Japanese-style “lost decade,” that didn’t happen: the Federal Reserve was able to engineer a recovery from that recession by cutting interest rates.

But the truth is that we were looking Japanese for quite a while: the Fed had a hard time getting traction. Despite repeated interest rate cuts, which eventually brought the federal funds rate down to just 1 percent, the unemployment rate just kept on rising; it was more than two years before the job picture started to improve. And when a convincing recovery finally did come, it was only because Alan Greenspan had managed to replace the technology bubble with a housing bubble.

Now the housing bubble has burst in turn, leaving the financial landscape strewn with wreckage. Even if the ongoing efforts to rescue the banking system and unfreeze the credit markets work — and while it’s early days yet, the initial results have been disappointing — it’s hard to see housing making a comeback any time soon. And if there’s another bubble waiting to happen, it’s not obvious. So the Fed will find it even harder to get traction this time.

In other words, there’s not much Ben Bernanke can do for the economy. He can and should cut interest rates even more — but nobody expects this to do more than provide a slight economic boost.

On the other hand, there’s a lot the federal government can do for the economy. It can provide extended benefits to the unemployed, which will both help distressed families cope and put money in the hands of people likely to spend it. It can provide emergency aid to state and local governments, so that they aren’t forced into steep spending cuts that both degrade public services and destroy jobs. It can buy up mortgages (but not at face value, as John McCain has proposed) and restructure the terms to help families stay in their homes.

And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling.

Will the next administration do what’s needed to deal with the economic slump? Not if Mr. McCain pulls off an upset. What we need right now is more government spending — but when Mr. McCain was asked in one of the debates how he would deal with the economic crisis, he answered: “Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control.”

If Barack Obama becomes president, he won’t have the same knee-jerk opposition to spending. But he will face a chorus of inside-the-Beltway types telling him that he has to be responsible, that the big deficits the government will run next year if it does the right thing are unacceptable.

He should ignore that chorus. The responsible thing, right now, is to give the economy the help it needs. Now is not the time to worry about the deficit.

.

'Do the right thing'... but beware divide and conquer tactics...

After weeks of dragging their feet, MAS has decided to act, but......

Oct 18, 2008
Do the right thing
MAS says priority will be given to lowly-educated retirees who lost money in its probe into mis-selling.

By Ignatius Low & Francis Chan

LOWLY-EDUCATED retiree investors who put their savings in structured products linked to the collapsed Lehman Brothers have been singled out by the Government for special attention.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) wants banks and financial institutions to give this group top priority when investigating complaints of mis-selling.

Instead of giving retirees priority, why not equally to all? Is it because retirees are mostly older and may not live as long as "non-retiree" investors? All investors should be accorded the same treatment. No one group should be accorded preferential treatment. The collective action by the victims forced MAS to act. By giving some priority over others, is someone hoping to split the group and then deal with them one by one? Hmmm........


Second incident, somewhat alike, the ongoing foreign worker dormitory at Serangoon Garden.

Serangoon Garden residents who don't want to 'guai guai' go along with gahment's decision to build a dormitory there have been making a lot of noise. So far Sporeans I have spoken to support the actions of these residents. Becos they too dislike the idea of having a worker dormitory so close to their homes and community. And crucially the unchecked import of such workers to alarming numbers in recent years.

But going by reports, articles and letters to the 148th, it seems like some Sporeans are very critical of Serangoon Garden residents and their actions. Words ranging from snobbish, xenophobic, racist, elitish etc were used to label the 'enemy'. Totally irrational and seems like a smear campaign to tarnish the 'enemy'.

To me it is very clear the 148th and their editors blindly support all gahment decisions or policies, and will chut all necessary patterns to wage a media war on whoever they perceive as 'enemy'. In such a war, anyone who is not pro-Gahment is the enemy, even if supporting the Gahment means being anti-Spore and anti-Sporeans!

Kangaroos felt scandalised...

Oct 15, 2008
A-G takes trio to court for 'scandalising judiciary'
'Kangaroo in judge's robe' T-shirt at centre of case
By Goh Chin Lian

According to the AGC, the three men had 'scandalised the Singapore Judiciary by publicly wearing identical white T-shirts, imprinted with a palm-sized picture of a kangaroo dressed in a judge's gown, within and in the vicinity of the New Supreme Court Building'.

By this, they meant to imply the Court was a kangaroo court, it added.

A kangaroo court is generally understood as being a court characterised by unauthorised or irregular procedures, or sham and unfair legal proceedings, noted the AGC. It also said Tan made his 'This is a kangaroo court' remark as MM Lee walked past him outside Court 4B.

Tan was also responsible, it added, for the appearance of an article, 'Police question activists over kangaroo T-shirts', and a photo of the trio in the T-shirts on the SDP website on July 27.

'The article and the photograph...were meant to give wider publicity to their allegation that the Court was a kangaroo court,' said the AGC.

It accused them of engaging in a 'deliberate and calculated course of action to impugn the reputation of and undermine public confidence in the Singapore Judiciary, and to lower its authority in the administration of justice in Singapore'.

Lawyers interviewed said it was the first time they had heard of a contempt of court case involving the wearing of T-shirts.

"Who you calling a kangaroo?" *uurp*

Fly the flag and 21 gun slaute to JBJ

If you would like to show your support for all that Mr. Jeyaretnam stood for, how about putting this flag on your blog too, just as both the picture maker and video producer have suggested? You can also include this paragraph, so that your readers, upon reading, can do their part too, on their blogs. Many of us, for one reason or another, have not shown direct support for JBJ in real life when he was alive, com'on, let us be brave enough to at least take a stand, and show our virtual support, OK?

A true patriot has passed away

Veteran opposition politican J. B. Jeyaretnam, passed away early this morning. JBJ, 82, died at about 1.30 am from a heart attack at his son's home in Singapore.

A sad day for Singapore becos she has lost a true patriot and a true Singaporean.

I salute you Mr JBJ.

You will always be remembered for your courage and tenacity. For standing up to tyranny and those who sought to crush you through dirty means and misuse of justice.

Singaporeans like myself will always remember you! Your efforts to bring democratic change to Singapore will not be in vain.

A fond farewell from this recruit to you, Mr JBJ.

No prescription is needed...

because it is alreay too late. The rot and poison has sunk in too deep. Any medication will only worsen the patient's suffering long before any improvement.

The only way for change will come is for him to leave the scene and "move on" hehehe.

Sep 23, 2008
No presciption needed: MM
By Li Xueying

IN GOVERNING Singapore, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew sees no need to follow anyone's prescription on democracy.

Instead, his focus is on what works.

Speaking last Sunday on the CNN programme Global Public Square, Mr Lee said his goal is to keep Singapore a first-world oasis in a third-world situation.

...

But he also noted the criticisms that Mr Lee had exercised too tight a control over the country, leading to 'too domineering and coercive a state'.

Mr Lee, Singapore's first Prime Minister from 1959 to 1990, replied that Singaporeans can choose which government they want to have through the vote.

'Nobody has ever alleged any chicanery - no bribery, no coercion, no nothing. We have never won less than... two-thirds of the vote,' he said.

Oh really???

The broken record keeps spinning the same old tune and raionale. Like a koyok street peddler who sells dated medicine laced with dunno what ingredients inside... laced with maybe even melamine! But only there is no AVA to regulate and check his products. (oops AVA also lousy example.. hehehe)

Only last year i remember him talking about the nation entering a Golden Period. See? So much for his alleged wisdom hahaha.
.

Playing with numbers

In page A4 of the States Times, the article on inflation puts a positive spin on rising inflation rate. It says...

Some relief expected as July price rises ease to 6.5% after 26-year high

But on page B5, coverage of parliament news in the article 'Feisty exchange over aid for poorest households' at the bottom of the article it says...

The exchange took place as the Trade and Industry Ministry released figures that showed rising prices in the first half of this year had hit the bottom 20% per cent of Singaporeans the hardest. They faced an inflation rate of 7.4 per cent in the first half of this year, as compared to 6.9 per cent for the middle 60 percent and top 20 percent of households by income.

So in other words the bottom 20% of household by income suffered 7.4% inflation while the rest suffered 6.9%. So how is the earlier 6.5% derived?

But this is the States Times, very credible one according to the PAP. So who am I to doubt the numbers haha..

(Btw the 26-year high inflation number is 7.5% according to Bloomberg. So a drop from 7.5% to 7.4% must be credited to the unique and extraordinary competence of the PAP garment lah hehe..)

Also on page B5, news on upcoming public transport fare hikes changes.

The distance-based system will cut transport bills for four in 10 commuters who make transfers on their journeys now.

While MPs welcome this, they remain concerned that commuters who take direct services might end up paying more.

Isn't this a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul? The other 6 pays more, and end result you can bet yet more revenue for the transport operators. Once again what the pap garment has shown itself to be very good at is to keep the money within a pool, like the compulsory annuities like that. The garment itself does not come out a single cent, yet end up skimming a little for itself hahaha! sibei lan jiao sia!

Bus and train ridership are up like never before, but fares have been increasing every year whereas service standards have declined. Already twice this month i encountered two train disruptions on the East-West Line. One of which all the commuters had to vacate the train and wait for the next service. At all times of the day now, even 11pm on weekday nights, the trains are packed like sardines, and everyone i speak to tells me the situation is getting worse. Sometimes it is so packed until the aircon like not working, hot and stuffy... maybe the aircon really not working! The transport operators are making profits like never before, and they have the cheek to raise fares? KNNBCCB!

i started off writing this post in a cheery mood.. but now lim peh hot liao.. KNN!

SG lawyers pwned! LOL

The legal profession gets a little Uniquely Singapore treatment.

Aug 4, 2008
Why Law Society should not join political debate

IN HER column last Friday, 'Move politics beyond a spectator sport', Ms Chua Mui Hoong argues that in the game of politics, the Government should just be the groundsman who maintains the sports field, and allows others free access to play the game.

That is not how the government works in any country. In a democracy, when voters elect a political party to form the government, they are choosing the leadership team and its policies to take the country forward. Naturally, citizens are still free to participate in political debate, and to organise themselves into interest groups or parties to do so. But when views differ on important issues, the ultimate test of which should prevail has to be who can win the support of citizens for his point of view. This means political parties have to contest elections, put the issue to voters, and settle the matter through the ballot.

Ms Chua advocates empowering the Law Society to comment publicly on legislation, whether or not referred to it by the Government. Laws, however, are the tools to achieve social, political or economic objectives, and these objectives themselves are not the prerogative of lawyers, but should be decided in the political arena. Lawyers who want to join this debate, or promote their political views, are free to get together and form associations to push for these views, just like other citizens.

But to argue for the Law Society to join the political debate, as Ms Chua does, is to misunderstand its nature and role. The society is a statutory body created by Parliament for a specific purpose, namely to oversee the governance and discipline of the legal profession. There is no reason to give it a special status beyond this to play a political role, especially when no other professional body has such a right.

The council of the Law Society is elected by lawyers to oversee the profession. On political issues, the views of the Law Society, as expressed through its council, will not necessarily reflect the views of the profession as a whole. If the Law Society could participate in politics, we would in effect be licensing its council members to push their personal political agendas, using the resources, status and cover of the Law Society. This is in the interests of neither the legal profession nor Singapore.

S. Radha
Press Secretary to the Minister for Law

Ooooh... nothing like a little subtle reminder to make those lawyers tremble and know their places hahaha! And most Sg lawyers will not have the courage to speak the truth to PAP gahmen.

.

Nothing to say just STFU lah..

This guy is another total Cannot-Make-It in my book. Only know how to echo other ministers...

July 31, 2008
Pushing up wages to offset inflation risky move, warns NTUC chief
By Lee Siew Hua

PUSHING wages up to fully offset inflation is a risky move, as workers will end up paying ever-higher prices.

Labour chief Lim Swee Say highlighted this vicious circle on Thursday in a message for National Day, calling on workers to moderate wage expectations.

'Instead of pushing wages up to fully offset inflation, we must continue to link built-in wage increase to productivity gain and help our people through various non-wage measures', he said.

This will prevent a 'price-wage spiral'.

His message came as the second-quarter jobs figures released by the Ministry of Manpower on Thursday showed job creation moderated to 70,600 from April to June and the unemployment rate creeping up to 2.3 per cent.

KNN warn simi lanjiao? So why dont u something about the inflation then?!

Let's see, now unemployment is rising liao.. so wat is the gahment doing about it? Bite some more bullets? Let see you bite the bullet instead... knn...

And he doesn't give any specific what those non-wage measures are... how convenient.
.

After LKY's recent self-pawn acts (court room & IBA flip flops), it is time for some damage control. And who better to carry out this public relations task than the very experienced GCT.

July 26, 2008
Our goal: Strong govt, responsible opposition
SM Goh says politics here must evolve but not in a way leading to division or chaos
By Jeremy Au Yong

SINGAPORE'S political system must change to keep pace with an evolving society, said Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong on Saturday night.

While conceding that the 'status quo cannot last forever', he noted that certain things must not change.

'Whatever the refinements we may make to our political system down the road, some core principles must remain the same,' he said.

'One, any changes must be fair to all parties and give them an equal chance to contest and win; two, they must not lead to democratic chaos and politics of division; and three, they must not put Singapore's unity and harmony, growth and prosperity and long-term interests at risk.'

He was speaking at the National Day dinner in the opposition-held Hougang ward, returning there for the first time since the 2006 General Election.

'Ideally, our political system should facilitate the emergence of a strong, effective government after every election and a responsible, constructive opposition,' he added.

'But...there is no guarantee because it depends on whether good, honest and competent people come forward to stand for elections and the wisdom of the electorate when they cast their ballot.'

IMO Sg politics will only evolve after a certain octogenarian leaves the scene.

Goh makes a lot of general remarks. But they sound hollow to me. His 'goal' is whose goal? PAP's? He also talks about the "wisdom of the electorate", which really is just another way of saying what this man said about mad voters hehehe..

.

Stuck at lower needs?

According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, a theory on human motivation, people move up to higher needs once their lower needs are met. Lower needs refer to satisfying basic human and survival instincts like shelter, safety, hunger, and sex. Higher needs are esteem, self-actualisation, respect for and by others and so on.

According to this establishment figure, staying at the top requires people who are still hungry...

July 24, 2008
Key to staying No. 1 - young people who are hungry

IT IS a uniquely-worded warning against complacency, and former Economic Development Board (EDB) chief Philip Yeo reiterated it yesterday: Don't sit down and fan yourselves.

At the Pioneers Series dialogue, a quote that he had used previously was read out to him, much to the amusement of the audience.

'When you become No.1 you say you have arrived,' the former top civil servant had once said.

'Once you arrive, everybody laughs, everybody sits down and fans themselves.

'When people are fanning themselves, congratulating themselves, praising themselves - 'Oh, we have arrived', 'How good we are' - that's when you get the 'arrive and fall' of nations.'

Mr Yeo elaborated on that comment yesterday, a pun on the phrase 'rise and fall of nations'.

'We are here today, but we may not be here tomorrow. When I travel around, I always take a look at what's happening in India, in Vietnam...

'We did it, they can do it. We're No.1 today, yes. We've been No.1 for 10 years in a row, yes. But don't forget they are now close, the gap is narrowing.'

This is very standard and dated establishment talk. The goal to be No. 1. But i think people these days have moved on & are instead thinking deeper about what it means to be No. 1. Does being at the top benefit them and meet their needs? Are theirs lower or higher needs?

What about the price to pay for being No. 1? What if the benefits of being No.1 are not fairly distributed and only benefits a small elite group?

As to how Singapore can keep up, Mr Yeo turned to the word 'hunger', a term he used many times throughout the session.

He said: 'Our people must realise that being No.1 is very temporal.

'We better keep on honing that...Make sure that our young people are hungry. If our young people are not hungry enough, bring in hungrier ones from overseas. Make them feel hungry, increase the hungriness index.'

So his solution to complacency is to find/import people who are hungry? Wah lao this really make me laugh hahaha! I cannot believe his thinking is so simplistic and narrow. Sure you can always import "hungry" foreigners from less developed countries. But what happens after you have fed their hunger? Wont that be the same? And why discriminate against old people?? Old people cannot be hungry meh?

So you treat people like production units? Use and chuck? This really says a lot of his mentality and perspective on people development (more like lack of) sia.. very old economy leh ~ hehehe

Undeniably SG as a society has reached a level of affluence. We have become quite well fed for sure. But so too have many others before us. Have these other affluent societies become less hungry? Japan, South Korea, many western nations. How come they can continue to innovate, grow, and surpass despite being well fed? Obviously the "hunger" we are talking about is not those of lower needs but higher ones.

When it comes to higher needs, I say the SG society is suffering from malnutrition. As a result people are moving to more open societies to feed their higher needs. Any coincidence these societies tend to be more open ones that have a healthy respect for human rights, freedom, tolerance for dissent, and healthy political competition?



Hmm... i think Yeo Yo man don't understand any of it leh... Is he still stuck at lower needs? For example Sg's ministers are the best paid in the world, so they cannot possibly be hungry right? And they are old too! So by Yeo's logic shouldn't these ministers be replaced by others who are young and more hungry? LOL


P.S. Anyway Yo yo likes to threaten and sue bloggers one, i wonder what needs of his will that fulfill? Hahahaha!
.

No $$$ no talk!

Toilet break hero is now worth $1 million!

July 21, 2008
Two S'porean businessmen offer $1m bounty for Mas Selamat's capture

A $1 MILLION cash bounty has been offered for information that will lead to Jemaah Islamiah (JI) fugitive Mas Selamat Kastari's arrest.

Two businessmen have approached the Home Affairs Ministry to put up the reward, Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng told Parliament on Monday.

The businessmen have asked to remain anonymous because they do not want their families or business interests in the region to be a target.

Mr Wong reiterated that while Police do not offer cash rewards, they will not object if private firms or individuals wish to do so.

This is not the first time a bounty for Mas Selamat has been offered.

The United States has offered rewards in the millions for the capture of top terrorists with links to Al-Qaeda. These include JI bombmaker Noordin Top.

Yaloh better stay anonymous, wait Mas's buddies overseas buay song how? I wonder why the two businessman so generous? Maybe like that they will get into gahment's good books and win gahment tenders? hehehe...

In a separate statement, the Ministry of Home Affairs said it has agreed to the request of the two private individuals to manage the $1 million reward.

'As a policy, the Home Team security agencies, including the Singapore Police Force and Central Narcotics Bureau, do not itself offer cash rewards or bounties for information on fugitives and unsolved crimes, or for assistance by the public', the ministry explained.

The policy, however, does not preclude private corporations or individuals from doing so if they are acting on their own volition to assist in the procurement of information pertinent to the police.

Is this policy inflexible? Are you so capable and confident of your abilities that you dun need any help or pay for assistance? If ministers are expected to be paid millions in order to stay corruption-free and contribute to public service, then i dun see why ordinary Sgians have to volunteer assistance FOC.

.

9 years & 18 strokes for a victimless crime

The story of Cpl Dave Teo is a very sad one. It is clear he needs help.

July 7, 2008
NSman Dave Teo's behavioural problems stem from disturbed upbringing

National Serviceman Dave Teo Ming was often caned by his mother when he was a young schoolboy and his father was in and out of jail for various offences.

His mother would beat him sometimes for no discernible reason or whenever she lost money on gambling.

And the beatings were no "normal beating'.

'The cane anyhow whack, whack until I got bruises,' he said in a psychiatric report submitted by the Institute of Mental Health, which was tendered in the High Court on Monday, when he was sentenced to nine years and two months, with 18 strokes of the cane for unlawful possession of a rifle, bullets and a knife.

The report presented a picture of his disturbed upbringing, scarred by constant beatings, rejection by his own mother who left him in the care of his paternal grandparents when he was in Primary one or two, after she walked out on him with his younger sister.

Teo's grandparents and aunt confirmed the beatings and remembered how traumatised Teo was as a child. They reported that his mother would even throw chairs at him.

After she left the family, the grandparents became the main caregivers to Teo and his brother who was two years younger.

Although he was not beaten as much, his paternal uncle, who lived with him, would punch and slap him if he misbehaved during his teens.

When he was 14, his younger brother was killed in a road accident.

This caused Teo 'to spiral downwards with disciplinary problems', said the IMH report. 'He was filled with anger and 'hated everybody''.

He became depressed and isolated himself from the family.

The behavioural problems and brushes with law continued, and he had to drop out of school at Secondary 3.

Possessive boyfriend

Teo started dating Ms Crystal Liew when he was 16. She was then 14. The relationship graduated to a sexual one when she turned 16.

By his own admission, Teo was a highly possessive boyfriend.

When she went out with her friends, he would feel extremely jealous and become abusive of her. He would call her up and demanded that she went home immediately.

There were times that he would hurl vulgarities at her and he also admitted that he had hit her several times, according to the IMH report.

In early 2007, Teo was posted for a short stint to Taiwan as part of his national service.

The couple continued to quarrel over the phone and in April last year, they broke up.

That was the final act and Teo snapped.

'He had nightmares about dying or being killed and in his waking hours, thought of suicide,' said the psychiatric report.

His sleep became disturbed, he lost weight over the next few months and he became withdrawn. His concentration became poor and 'his libido also dropped'.

In camp, he became easily irritated, and vented his anger by kicking the cupboard and being rude to his superiors.

He also began to hear voices of people who were not there.

Stalked ex-girlfriend

When he returned to Singapore from Taiwan, he started stalking Ms Liew, hanging out at her condominium and outside her school.

He even went absent without leave from camp to spend his nights at a stairwell at her condo. He was eventually caught and sent to the SAF detention barracks.

After he stopped contacts with Ms Liew, he went further downhill. He no longer cared about his appearance, became reclusive and started drinking to overcome his insomnia.

'He became self-destructive and recalls exercising till the point of exhaustion and then denying himself water,' said the report.

Dave stole a rifle along with 8 bullets and went AWOL. The law says unlawful possession of weapons, the prosecution asked for a deterrent sentence and got it - 9 years jail and 18 strokes of the rotan. This is the "help" he gets, and the judge has this to say...

July 7, 2008
'My heart hurts for you': Judge to NSman

JUSTICE Tay Yong Kwang explained to Awol National Serviceman Dave Teo Min why he would have to impose a deterrent sentence before jailing him for a total of nine years and two months, with 18 strokes of the cane, for having a rifle, eight bullets and a knife.

In a display of compassion, the High Court judge on Monday told the 20-year-old, who had earlier pleaded guilty to the three charges: 'My heart hurts for you that so young a man will have to spend some of the best years of his life in prison and have to undergo so many strokes of the cane, but I trust that you understand that a deterrent sentence is unavoidable in the circumstances.'

Justice Tay said Teo had committed a very grave offence by taking a rifle and ammunition out of camp for his 'own purposes' - 'especially so in this age of increased security concerns everywhere'.

Why is a deterrent sentence unavoidable? Where is the victim here? Is Mas Selemat more dangerous or a confused NSF? How about a "deterrent sentence" too for those responsible for Mas Selemat's escape? After all Mas is still at large and has the potential to cause some really serious damage and harm.

He told the NSman who sparked a 20-hour manhunt on Sept 2, 2007, when he walked out of Mandai Hill camp with an SAR-21 rifle and eight rounds of bullets, and was finally tracked down to a toilet in a shopping mall the following day: 'Dave, you have had a very hard life.'

'I hope that this unfortunate and traumatic wrong turn in your life will make you much more mature and a whole lot wiser and that you will spend the next few years reconstructing your young life.'

Dave has already spent a year in jail. How does throwing him into jail for another 9 years help reconstruct his life? Do we compound an UNFORTUNATE turn in his life with a further "unfortunate" 9 years in jail? Doesn't make sense leh... So unfortunate hor??

'I hope that you will pursue your studies, listen to good advice from counsellors and learn many skills while in prison and that, upon your release, you will have a life full of meaning and purpose to honour the memory of your grandmother and your beloved younger brother.'

'It has been written, 'To everything there is a season.' There was a time when you loved, there came a time when you hated. There was a time when you felt you wanted to kill, now is the time for you to heal.'

'There was a time you were broken down, now is the time to build yourself up. There was a time when you were at war in your being, now is the time to restore peace within.'

'In spite of your difficult childhood and in spite of what you have done, do not ever give up on yourself.'

The judge talks a lot hor? I think he wants to because he knows the sentence is overly harsh and unjust. Are his hands tied? Is he really talking to make himself feel better for compounding Dave Teo's sufferings?

And what is the purpose of a deterrent sentence other than to send out a symbolic message? And is such a message even effective when applied to young men who momentarily lost their head or caught in a moment of passion? Becos the real problem isn't Dave Teo, but it is how the rifle and bullets were so easily taken out of camp. Humans have passion, another troubled upbringing, another confused soul, then what? Another deterrent sentence? 20 yrs then?

The punishment here does not fit the crime or the harm caused. The only victim here is Dave Teo, and maybe SAF's fragile ego and some elites' faces. But this is SG, and for unfortunate people like Dave Teo who falls through the crack, the system punishes them instead of helping them.

.

Non-PAP supporters are mad!

The recent outburst from LKY is quite amazing. He warned that a freak result could happen if voters became bored and decided to give the “vociferous opposition” a chance — out of “light-heartedness, fickleness or sheer madness”.

WTF sia! First he call Chee Soon Juan a psychopath, now anyone who does not vote PAP is doing it our of sheer madness!

I am reminded of my recent chat with a non-opposition supporter recently... the mentality is the same, if you are not with us, you must be against us. These non-opposition supporters are almost like terrorists! They exhibit such extremism, intolerance, anger and hate. Who needs Mas Selamat when Spore is already filled with these fanatics? Hahahaha

Death of a slave

My heart goes out to Recruit Cheah and his loved ones. Just 5 days into NS enlistment he is dead.

Meanwhile the SAF busy themselves with investigations and causes of death. The outcome will always be the same. Rules were followed, no one is at fault, blah blah blah. "Let's move on!" Soon like many before him Recruit Cheah will be forgotten. He did not even get as much as a page mention in the papers, so unlike the officer trainee who died in Brunei.

Slaves are expendable. They cannot blame anyone except themselves because they are born into it.

The SAF may give the OCT a grand send-off. But i reserve my solemn salute only for Recruit Cheah and the many lowly ranks like him. At their most vulnerable moment, the system failed them and their loved ones.

听说有一种鸟是没有脚的，从一出生它就一直在飞，自由自在，飞累了就睡在云上。

这种鸟一生中只下地一次，那就是它死的时候。

其实这只是个骗人的故事。这种鸟其实哪里也没有去过, 因为一开始它就已经死了。

Rest now my fellow recruit. Peace and freedom is yours.

.

Unlike reputation, character cannot be bought

This case has been one fraught with acrimony and controversy. Many legal points have been raised, some of which I have understood, others completely bewildered me. But all the points raised centred around one subject: Whether there was malice when we published that NKF article.

Let me deal with this point. It is clear as daylight that the plaintiffs sued not because their reputations were tarnished but that it was a way to stop our campaigning over the issue during the elections.

Instead of letting the public decide, they have dragged the courts in and insisted that the courts adjudicate in a matter where it should not. In the process, they put the courts in an untenable and unenviable position. This is a tragedy that history will not kindly look upon.

But a court case is what we have and court cases are about seeking the truth and allowing that truth to surface.

As I pointed out, the question centres around whether there was malice on our part. I cannot deny that I get angry and even bitter with Mr Lee Kuan Yew over the things that he has said and done to me and others.

But through the years, I have seen the bigger picture and developed a sense of calm and equanimity that comes with knowing my role in society.

And because I feel at ease, I don't hate Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Lee Hsien Loong. I don't wish them ill in anyway despite all that they have done and continue to do to me and my family.

I harbour no hatred towards Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Lee Hsien Loong, much less any malice.

To hate my opponents would drag me down to their level of rancour and deceit which has no place in what we're trying to achieve for Singapore. More so I find it too draining and distracting to harbour those emotions.

My Christian faith guides me and it is a faith that compels me to fight for justice and to treat my fellow men and women with compassion.

Mr Lee tempts and taunts me to get out of bankruptcy and get back into the stream of political life that he sits as lord and master. Believe me, in such an environment it is a temptation that can be overpowering.

That I said to Mr Lee Kuan Yew during the cross-examination is exactly where I stand. I feel sorry for him but I don't hate him.

But I also told him that ultimately it isn't about him. Neither is it about his son, and it most certainly is not about me. It is about this country and the people who live in it.

It is about what is just. It is about compassion and how we treat our fellow men. It is about freedom and human dignity.

A society stripped bare of these virtues is a society unable to embrace humanity. But what is society without humanity is a thought too frightening to entertain.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew kept on repeating how he built up this country and how much he has stored in the reserves. That is the tragedy of the man. For all his intelligence, he does not possess the wisdom of life.

Because unlike reputation, character cannot be bought. A true statesmen will not need to fight for his reputation, for that will shine through even after he takes his final bow and leaves the stage of life. His name will linger on and be writ large fondly in the hearts of many for generations to come.

Many lies have been spread about truly great leaders. And yet these lies have never been able to snuff out the greatness in these individuals. On the contrary, their legacy grows in size and intensity.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew fights all his demons within himself to try to shore up his reputation. In the process, however, he destroys the very legacy that he so desperately desires to establish.

Then he pulled out the citation from Transparency International Malaysia and tried to use it as an endorsement of his integrity it, frankly, surprised me because it showed me how empty Mr Lee's life has become.

Such an intelligent man and yet so utterly devoid of wisdom. Can he not understand that no paper, no award, no citation can ever hope to still the voices of those who see the truth behind the propaganda?

I take no joy in pointing out to him how TIM is not an established, well-grounded institution on which one can take pride in being awarded a citation especially on the subject on integrity. In fact, I felt bad to point that out because it seemed that it was all the MM was clinging to.

Mr Lee must understand that integrity cannot, and does not, come from the grandiloquence of one's speech, it must shine forth from the righteousness of one's heart. If that light of righteousness is dim, no amount of persuasion will change reality.

Can he not grasp the fact that no amount of wealth and power can hold back the silent voices forever? When he is no longer with us in this world, no amount of suppression can hold back the vehemence of his critics.

I hope he takes the little time that he has left to ponder what I have said and to turn from his ways. It is not too late.

Over the last couple of days in court I have observed, as have many here, how those around him treat him with such servitude that made my hair stand on end. For whatever reason, they go out of their way to show him their subservience.

They are doing him a disservice by not telling him that he needs to amend his ways if he so desires to uphold his integrity. Maybe he has chosen to surround himself with these yes-people. Either way Mr Lee is moving in life's wrong direction.

Which brings me to the damages. I stand by everything I have written in the article in The New Democrat about the NKF as it relates to the running of this country because it is the truth and Mr Lee and the rulers of this country must always hear the truth no matter how inconvenient that may be.

I know what I say at now will not make a difference in terms of damages because I know it will not make a difference.

I willingly assume the position in this life because if this is the path that God has chosen for me then I cannot run away.

I can leave this country or I can capitulate and join what others have done in politics under the PAP. I will do neither. For to me my own integrity is at stake and that cannot be paid for in dollars.

Mr Lee may try to tempt me out of bankruptcy but it will not work. I may remain a bankrupt for the rest of my life as a result of my obstinacy.

It is not a position one aspires to but it is a cause I find worthy of battle and a call, though sometimes I may resist, I will ultimately trust and obey.

So, Your Honour, we have come to the stage where all of us will be held to account for what we do today. It is said that as we make our bed, so shall we lie in it.

That we do today will live on in history forever. I do not envy your position. I ask that you forgive me if I have offended you in a personal way. I had no intention of doing that. In another place and time, we would be perhaps be good friends.

But I have to take issue with your position as a Judge and what you have done as well as the decisions you have made in this courtroom. To that extent I will fight you with every fibre of my being for the sake of justice.

We all have decisions to make in life. I have made mine and I am at ease with it. You have yours to make. I wish you wisdom and honesty.

Thank you.

CHEE SOON JUAN

28th May 2008

.

Taiwan wants to become like Spore?? LOL

The Lees are suing Dr Chee and SDP.

May 28, 2008
Chee takes issue with NGO endorsements listed by MM
SDP chief dismisses NGO reports cited by MM with good views of Singapore, listing instead those that rate the country poorly

SINGAPORE Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan yesterday questioned the types of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) whose ratings and reports Singapore paid attention to.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew had listed a few, including Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (Perc); IMD, the Swiss business school which produces the World Competitiveness Yearbook; and Transparency International, which awarded him a Global Integrity Medal in 2000.

But Dr Chee dismissed the medal as a 'ridiculous piece of paper', and rattled off his own list of NGOs which did not rate Singapore highly.

His beef: Singapore and its leaders choose to listen only to NGOs which give the country a good rating, and base their integrity and leadership skills on such reports.

'Are you including the International Commission of Jurists? Are you including Human Rights Watch? Are you including Amnesty International? Are you including the International Federation for Free Exchange? Are you including the South-east Asian Press Alliance? Are you including Liberal International?' he asked.

'Let us not pick and choose what endorsements you get, because over all, if you're trying to show me your standing in the world is that high, you wouldn't be clutching at straws and producing something from Tunku (Abdul) Aziz,' he charged.

Dr Chee was referring to the president of Transparency International's Kuala Lumpur branch, which gave MM Lee the integrity medal in 2000.

Dr Chee alleged that its chairman, Mr Peter Eigen, whom he met, told him he did not authorise its Malaysia branch to give MM Lee the award.

Reading from the citation for the award earlier, Senior Counsel Davinder Singh had noted: 'In endorsing this award, the chairman of Transparency International, Mr Peter Eigen, says: 'The role of Lee Kuan Yew in fighting corruption in Singapore is well known and is considered an important model for fighting against corruption.''

Dr Chee was cross-examining MM Lee on Day 2 of the hearing to decide on defamation damages owed by the SDP, himself and his sister Chee Siok Chin.

At issue was the use of NGO reports as a testimony of MM Lee's integrity, which Dr Chee attacked.

MM Lee explained that Singapore paid attention to NGO reports which investors use as a reference when deciding which countries to put their money in.

'There are liberal organisations which disagree with the way Singapore runs its social systems, but we believe we know better, otherwise we wouldn't be here,' said MM Lee.

To this, Dr Chee interjected that MM Lee was being 'a little presumptuous' to think that Singapore would not be what it is without him and his government.

Dr Chee asserted that places such as Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea thrive without MM Lee's system of governance.

In response, MM Lee cited how the President of Taiwan, Mr Ma Ying-jeou, after a visit here earlier, said he wanted Taiwan to become like Singapore, corruption-free.

China premier Wen Jiabao, added MM Lee, also told Hong Kong chief executive Donald Tsang to 'go to Singapore and see what they are doing'.

'There are various parts of this Government which do not comply with Western practices, including the law of libel, but it is a system that has worked,' said MM Lee.

Truth is countries like Taiwan and China wants to become like Spore only in certain areas, such as administrative expertise. They are certainly not endorsing LKY's political system. LKY conveniently ignored and twisted this fact.

Actually the whole exchange reminds me of an incident several years ago in NUS. Then LKY has gotten into a verbal tangle with a student, Jaime Han. Han has called LKY a despot (bravo!!!) and said that LKY loves to furnish one-sided examples to suit his argument while ignoring those critical of him. As LKY started to get worked up and get personal with Han, Han quite correctly excused himself and chose not to indulge Lee further leaving LKY seething. I managed to view the NUS video recording of the incident. I applaud Han for calling a spade a spade and the scowl on LKY's face is simply priceless hahaha!

As expected the 154th media has been extremely busy the past two days. When it comes to political coverage the 154th media is quite simply trash and completely biased. TODAY's coverage by some dick paulo pinoy is even worse. But thanks to the internet, I urge SGians to visit http://yoursdp.org/ to read the other side of the coverage and make up their own minds on what really goes on in court. The truth is probably somewhere in between and less flattering on LKY and his far from independent judiciary.

Why do they hate us so?

Today i chatted on msn with a charbor. SGian, late 20s, working single, NTU grad. The Mas Selemat affair being the hottest topic in town naturally we talked a bit about it. Somehow the topic went into politics...

ME: do u know People's Association? the PA?
Her: yah
ME: PA is in charge of community centres. WKS and LHL are the chairman and general secretary of the PA
ME: Resident's Committee and CRC are also under the PA
Her: so?
ME: where does the budget for PA comes from? from the govt?
Her: partly
ME: do u know that if an opposition MP wants to hold an event at the community centre he will be rejected
ME: whereas PAP MPs and non-MPs even hold events at the community centres
ME: so u can see party politics at play here. State resources are channelled to a party and used for that party's purpose. Yet an elected MP cannot use this resource simply bcos the MP is an opposition one
ME: during GE for example u see the PAP rallies, organised by the respective RCs.
ME: this is using state resources to advance a party's interests... salah lor
Her: it's politics lor
Her: opposition shouldn't make this sort of thing an issue
ME: it is gutter politics
Her: nothing is fair esp if u r in politics
ME: we will never rise above it if we condone such vindictive behaviour in our politicians
Her: it's the same everywhere
ME: just because everyone smokes does it mean we shld too?
Her: well if it's a smoking room then yes
Her: and being in politics there's no level field
Her: obama has more cash so he can do more ads than clinton
Her: that's an adv
Her: pap is the ruling govt
Her: and pa is state owned so of course there's no fairness
ME: there is no level playing field in the sense that yes u may hv more resources, backers, supporters etc. But the min u enact laws, institutionalise unjust barriers, u r going down the slippery slope
ME: a slope that will come back to bite u one day
ME: compete fairly, why so scared
Her: becoz they r ruthless remember
ME: PAP is not a small party at all, why so scared of the opposition? if the opposition are as bad as the PAP made them out to be, ppl will know how to vote, example u will vote for PAP wat
Her: i hate to hear opposition make these sort of claims
Her: to me it's like crying out loud they r being bullied and weak
Her: i'd rather hear them talk about issue!
Her: it's just whining
ME: i think i m not wrong to say that ur big issue got to do with economics and $
ME: civil rights isnt so important to u right?
Her: civil rights is ??? being bullied unfairly treated? invasion of privacy?
ME: bcos if u r able to let these "small" issues go and continue to b perpetuated, there is no end where it will stop, as long as there is $
Her: not true
Her: if these r normal folks and they r victimised then of course it's wrong
ME: how do u reconcile the fact that such "small" injustices can continue while expecting the opposition to present to u reforms and policies
Her: these r people trying to compete and first of all they r not victimised, they have a disadv
Her: and if they keep complaining i think it's silly
ME: so to complain about being victimised is silly??
Her: why not
ME: like that no need CASE liao lol
ME: the logic makes no sense
ME: how can u justify your money, my money, Sgians' money be used on one political party to further their own agenda? if u dun mind, u can just donate to PAP itself. the govt's money is not PAP's money u see
Her: they r still given the chance to hold rally right?
ME: that is not the point. The point is the PA, a branch of the govt, shld not be engaged in partisan politics
Her: but govt is pap
Her: that's the reality
ME: PAP forms the cabinet, the govt does not belong to the PAP
ME: big diff hor
ME: and this is why govt resources are being abused by the PAP to do PAP's biddings
Her: yes it's wrong, but do the opposition want to make this an issue?
ME: wat u r saying is since PAP forms the govt now they can do watever they please
Her: so that's the case and if the thing is not a big issue, what does it matter?
ME: do u feel this is right? wat do think of a govt that uses state resources in this manner?
Her: it works against opposition but not the people
ME: to say that it doesnt matter and say that it is acceptable is 2 diff thing
Her: i told u politics got no level playing field
ME: so u are telling me u accept this unfairness?
ME: it is acceptable to u?
Her: there's no need to whine about
Her: yes acceptable to me
Her: if i were an opposition
ME: in other words u accept blatant discrimination, in the name of politics
ME: u accept double standards
Her: yes becoz it's poliitcs
Her: and it's dirty
ME: it should not be, it is dirty if u make it so
Her: if one day there's a stronger credible opposition who doesn't whine, l'll look up to him/her (when such an oppo appear, wat will she expect next? that they can fly? LOL.. of cos i didnt say that)
ME: it is like saying it is ok, where is the moral principle??
ME: shocking
Her: u r so idealistic
Her: naive
ME: .................. (really speechless liao..)

A while later the topic went into oppression of opposition members in SG. She tried to justify the use of the ISA on opposition politicians in the past (in the 60s and 70s)...

Her: an oppression of an extreme oppostion who may give dangerous ideas can be amount to self defence by existing govt (wah.. use self-defense argument & paint oppo as extreme)
ME: well u hv to prove that the opposition is indeed extreme or dangerous
ME: r the opposition really dangerous? lets look at the ISA detainees
Her: yes taliban is an oppositon party too
Her: they r dangerous!
ME: do u know under the ISA, there is no open trial.
Her: can u deny the fact that groups like taliban are not dangerous? (omg! Sg oppo is taliban to her!)
ME: so all the political detainees were NEVER charged in court, no evidence were ever tabled against them to support allegations of them being dangerous elements
Her: so they can be given free speech on equal ground?
ME: so u see there is no prove that the opposition is dangerous. your argument again cannot stand
Her: u sound like u r the intellectual smart aleck
ME: i happen to be able to counter ur points thats all, i certainly dun wan to make ppl think i know a lot.. fact is i not smart, i cant even get into local uni lol
ME: "an oppression of an extreme oppostion who may give dangerous ideas can be amount to self defence by existing govt" - this is wat u wrote. I hv shown that this is groundless in Sg's context
Her: u think u know it all, what makes u think that the opposition is safe for sure? (siao liao.. attack-the-person tactic coming)
Her: i cannot be sure they r dangerous
Her: but how can u be sure they r safe?
ME: we deal with facts and logic. If u feel someone is dangerous, u got to show proof & evidence
Her: u deal with facts? i htink u deal with bias more
ME: this is the problem with the ISA. They cannot show facts n evidence, what it means that it can be used as a political weapon for dictators to preserve power and prevent competition
Her: look that's in the past
Her: like i said lky has to deal with this bad karma
Her: but it shouldn't give people like u a huge sympathy points over the opposition
ME: if u feel i m biased i cant help it, but the facts r facts, ppl will come to their own conclusions eventually
Her: but u can't deny the fact u have a huge sympathy points over the opposition
ME: how do u reach that conclusion? i merely presented facts that do not make the PAP look good
ME: in fact i tell u i pity LKY
ME: he could hv left a brilliant legacy, but as they say power corrupts
Her: from the way u support chee
ME: chee? i will speak up for anyone i feel has been unjustly victimised, not jus chee
Her: u actually support him?
ME: support in wat sense? if he comes and contest in my ward, i will vote for him over PAP any time
ME: if the WP or any opposition party comes to my ward, they will get my vote too
Her: see, why?
Her: just becoz they r victimised?
Her: so any tom dick harry on the opposite is worht ur vote?
Her: where's ur stand on being a singaporean then?
ME: because i do not condone the systematic unjust oppression of opposition politicians in my country
Her: to me u r slinging mud that's all
ME: mud slinging is wat the 148th media does best. Any wonder why they r ranked that way in press freedom? lol
Her: congrats u joined their ranks then
ME: to me it sounds like ppl who vote for oppo offends u .. how come?
ME: u can go vote for PAP, i wont be offended
ME: its your choice, i respect that
Her: people who vote any tom dick harry on the opposite offends me
Her: becoz they r not logical
Her: and never put the country's interest first
ME: do u think the country's interests is all about asset appreciation?
Her: it's definitely more than ur oppostion suppression
Her: its' about prospering and living in peace
ME: this is a very common phenomena i observed on the internet
ME: ppl who r sympathetic to the opposition are more forgiving, whereas ppl who are pro-pap are very unforgiving
Her: huh forgiving?
ME: they get angry even
ME: see? i can respect ur decision to vote for a party u want. But u seem unable to respect my decision to vote for the party i want.. that smacks of authoritarianism to me
Her: u know that's how people like bush can get into poliitics and be a leader
Her: becoz of pp like u!
ME: lol in the US i would be a democrat LOL the policies i support r liberal in nature
Her: doesn't matter what his stands on policies are
Her: just as long as he presents a different case...
Her: but here in sg
Her: ur support for a govt is one that's anti-pap (wah got wrong meh? must be pro-PAP one ah?? jialat sia..)
ME: this has been an interesting chat.. it will help in my analysis of how SGians view politics hehe

Wah piang! Do you think she is in love with me? Hahahaha!

She claimed that she is not pro-PAP or a PAP member leh, but from the anger and hate, i seriously hv my doubts sia... And this is not healthy at all for SG. Decades of political brainwashing and "national education" by the 148th media has resulted in hate mongering towards opposition politicians. It is dividing SGians instead of building an inclusive community regardless of one's political views and opinions. Sad siah ...